Background Understanding the factors associated with disease severity and mortality in Coronavirus disease (COVID-19) is imperative to effectively triage patients. We performed a systematic review to determine the demographic, clinical, laboratory and radiological factors associated with severity and mortality in COVID-19. Methods We searched PubMed, Embase and WHO database for English language articles from inception until May 8, 2020. We included Observational studies with direct comparison of clinical characteristics between a) patients who died and those who survived or b) patients with severe disease and those without severe disease. Data extraction and quality assessment were performed by two authors independently. Results Among 15680 articles from the literature search, 109 articles were included in the analysis. The risk of mortality was higher in patients with increasing age, male gender (RR 1.45, 95%CI 1.23–1.71), dyspnea (RR 2.55, 95%CI 1.88–2.46), diabetes (RR 1.59, 95%CI 1.41–1.78), hypertension (RR 1.90, 95%CI 1.69–2.15). Congestive heart failure (OR 4.76, 95%CI 1.34–16.97), hilar lymphadenopathy (OR 8.34, 95%CI 2.57–27.08), bilateral lung involvement (OR 4.86, 95%CI 3.19–7.39) and reticular pattern (OR 5.54, 95%CI 1.24–24.67) were associated with severe disease. Clinically relevant cut-offs for leukocytosis(>10.0 x109/L), lymphopenia(< 1.1 x109/L), elevated C-reactive protein(>100mg/L), LDH(>250U/L) and D-dimer(>1mg/L) had higher odds of severe disease and greater risk of mortality. Conclusion Knowledge of the factors associated of disease severity and mortality identified in our study may assist in clinical decision-making and critical-care resource allocation for patients with COVID-19.

Approximately 45% of metastatic colorectal cancer (mCRC) patients with wild-type KRAS exon 2 are resistant to cetuximab treatment. We set out to identify additional genetic markers that might predict the response to cetuximab treatment. Fifty-three wild-type KRAS exon 2 mCRC patients were treated with cetuximab/irinotecan-based chemotherapy as a first- or third-line therapy. The mutational statuses of 10 EGFR pathway genes were analyzed in primary tumors using next-generation sequencing. BRAF, PIK3CA, KRAS (exons 3 and 4), NRAS, PTEN, and AKT1 mutations were detected in 6, 6, 5, 4, 1, and 1 patient, respectively. Four of the BRAF mutations were non-V600 variants. Four tumors harbored multiple co-existing (complex) mutations. All patients with BRAF mutations or complex mutation patterns were cetuximab non-responders. All patients but one harboring KRAS, NRAS, or BRAF mutations were non-responders. Mutations in any one of these three genes were associated with a poor response rate (7.1%) and reduced survival (PFS = 8.0 months) compared to wild-type patients (74.4% and 11.6 months). Our data suggest that KRAS, NRAS, and BRAF mutations predict response to cetuximab treatment in mCRC patients.

Chronic wounds remain a substantial source of morbidity worldwide. An emergent approach that may be well-suited to induce the complex, multicellular processes such as angiogenesis that are required for wound repair is the use of extracellular vesicles (EVs). EVs contain a wide variety of proteins and nucleic acids that enable multifactorial signaling. Here, the capability of EVs is leveraged to be engineered via producer cell modification to investigate the therapeutic potential of EVs from mesenchymal stem/stromal cells (MSCs) transfected to overexpress long non-coding RNA HOX transcript antisense RNA (HOTAIR). HOTAIR is previously shown by the authors' group to be critical in mediating angiogenic effects of endothelial cell EVs, and MSCs are chosen as EV producer cells for this study due to their widely reported intrinsic angiogenic properties. The results indicate that MSCs overexpressing HOTAIR (HOTAIR-MSCs) produce EVs with increased HOTAIR content that promote angiogenesis and wound healing in diabetic (db/db) mice. Further, endothelial cells exposed to HOTAIR-MSC EVs exhibit increased HOTAIR content correlated with upregulation of the angiogenic protein vascular endothelial growth factor. Thus, this study supports EV-mediated HOTAIR delivery as a strategy for further exploration toward healing of chronic wounds.

Unlike antibody-mediated rejection (AMR) with clinical features, it remains unclear whether subclinical AMR should be treated, as its effect on allograft loss is unknown. It is also uncertain if AMR’s effect is homogeneous across donor (deceased/live) and (HLA/ABO) antibody types. We compared 219 patients with AMR (77 subclinical, 142 clinical) to controls matched on HLA/ABO-compatibility, donor type, prior transplant, PRA, age, and year. One and 5-year graft survival in subclinical AMR was 95.9% and 75.7%, compared to 96.8% and 88.4% in matched controls (P=0.0097). Subclinical AMR was independently associated with a 2.15-fold increased risk of graft loss (95%CI: 1.19–3.91; P=0.012) compared to matched controls, but not different from clinical AMR (P=0.13). 53.2% of subclinical AMR patients were treated with plasmapheresis within 3 days of their AMR-defining biopsy. Treated subclinical AMR patients had no difference in graft loss compared to matched controls (HR 1.73;95%CI: 0.73–4.05; P=0.21), but untreated subclinical AMR patients did (HR3.34;95%CI: 1.37–8.11; P=0.008). AMR’s effect on graft loss was heterogeneous when stratified by compatible deceased donor (HR=4.73;95%CI:1.57–14.26; P=0.006), HLA-incompatible deceased donor (HR=2.39;95%CI:1.10–5.19; P=0.028), compatible live donor (no AMR patients experienced graft loss), ABO-incompatible live donor (HR=6.13;95%CI:0.55–67.70; P=0.14), and HLA-incompatible live donor (HR=6.29;95%CI:3.81–10.39; P<0.001) transplant. Subclinical AMR substantially increases graft loss, and treatment seems warranted.